My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/10/2010 Meeting Minutes
DOcument-Host
>
Mayfield Village
>
Meeting Minutes
>
2010
>
08/10/2010 Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/22/2019 9:30:16 AM
Creation date
7/24/2018 8:08:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Legislation-Meeting Minutes
Document Type
Meeting Minutes
Date
8/10/2010
Year
2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
42
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Minutes of a Public Hearing <br />On Proposed Charter Review Revisions <br />8-10-10 <br />Page 11 <br />What this is saying is only the first ordinances are subject to a referendum of the <br />voters. Why is that? Well, if you don't like the idea of building a police station, <br />when this Council passed an ordinance to proceed with the building of the police <br />station, that was when the citizens should uprise, circulate their petitions and put <br />that on the ballot. If they don't do it, the next ordinances are going to be to <br />advertise for bids, to enter into contracts and to get multiple permits going from <br />the State, the EPA, all of which require ordinances. Once you enter into <br />contracts, once you authorize a contract, once you appropriate money, to do a <br />referendum on those subsequent ordinances would be illegal because you have <br />already committed to somebody to do something. <br />So, to have a referendum on only one aspect of a project for a capital <br />improvement makes no sense. It would be illegal. It would be entangled in legal <br />process. The Charter was adopted in the very beginning by the founding fathers <br />to limit the right of referendum to protect it on those types of issues. That's all <br />this amendxnent is doing, is clarifying that public improvements which have <br />multiple ordinances, you can only do referendum on the first ordinance on that. <br />That's what that one is all about. <br />That is all of the proposed amendments. This meeting is meant to discuss just those. <br />These are the ones that the Charter Review Commission has mandated to go on to the <br />ballot. They will go on the ballot. It's not a matter of us debating whether they should or <br />shouldn't, it's a matter of debating the merits of each of the ordinances and making a <br />decision at the voting booth in November when you have the opportunity to exercise your <br />right. <br />Council President Buckholtz thanked Mr. Diemert. He does not remember much of what <br />he learned in Civics in 6th grade, but he wishes Mr. Diemert was there to teach him this. <br />He is glad to have learned it tonight. <br />The audience applauded. <br />Public Portion of Hearing <br />Council President Buckholtz stated before we proceed, I would like to take a moment to explain <br />the process. We usually bring this up at all meetings, so it's nothing special for tonight. It's just <br />a reminder of a few issues of decorum. We ask each person that would like to speak to come up <br />to the podiutn and give their name and address so we can get it into the record. You will have 3- <br />5 minutes to speak. We would like to limit that so everybody gets a chance to be heard. One of <br />the things that we find often happens in these situations, if multiple people have the same point <br />of view, it would be nice if you could just stand up and be recognized. When someone makes a <br />comment you could raise your hand and stand up and say I would like to just add my name and <br />address to that comment. That way you are on the record as supporting that viewpoint without
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.